thanks for the informative and empathetic video. I'd just have one correction that Kibo (the main elephant in the video) is a boy. I think maybe for people who love elephants it's challenging to hear "trainer" or "handler" b/c they're associated with circuses or zoos (and have negative connotations). however, the reporter learned the term, keeper, quickly. in other ways the reporter appeared very informed about DSWT and elephant behavior and asked intelligent questions.
No, they sounded like they read a simple paragraph and called it a day. They made so many false statements, inaccurate statements, foolish statements, that it is apparent that they did not prepare for this visit or interview.
Boyd Matson doesn't appear to have done proper preparation for this video, in light of inaccurate statements and wording. In the video description, the first statement made is a false one: "Orphaned elephants have a hard time surviving without their mothers." That is blatantly incorrect. Orphaned elephants do Not survive without their mothers. In the video, Matson repeatedly mislabels these caretakers as "trainers" when they are not. These are not circus animals, they are animals from the Wild that are being nurtured and hand-reared for their survival. The elephant is Not in a "cage." Matson's verbiage is shamefully unlearned/incorrect/foolish. Their mothers did Not "abandon" them; their mothers were poached, or died from drought or other situation that was unavoidable by the mother elephant. It's unfortunate that Matson created a video where clearly, Matson had not done due diligence in first learning the subject matter. Before doing any radio show or other program, a true professional would prepare by learning the subject. I am dismayed that this person didn't do due diligence, and apparently, didn't take the subject seriously enough to first learn. This indicates a lack of respect for the seriousness of the situation, a lack of respect for their so-called "professional" role as a communicator, and a lack of respect for those they are supposing to inform. Where is the excellence in poor, blatantly false and inaccurate communication? DSWT does vital work that's very important, and it is offensive that Matson didn't see fit to be bothered to first learn with diligence. Matson, your reading an informational paragraph to prepare for this visit didn't equate to due diligence or adequate preparation. Become studious, invest the time, do due diligence, learn the realities before you attempt to teach others. 02:54 The name is Not "Seldrick", but Sheldrick. It feels like this person, Matson, wasn't serious about doing a good job at all. This is very poor and shamefully lazy. Foolish false "humor" doesn't replace intelligent communication. If the elephant had wanted to take the hat off, she would have and could have. Touching and sniffing are not trying to take the hat off, and the elephant was not saying "you're in the presence of a lady." Matson was trying to cover the lack of preparation with foolishness that was not humorous, but a disrespectful waste of time. Matson should have remained quiet and allowed Edwin to do the informing. Why would a person that is Not the knowledgeable one attempt to do the informing, when the knowledgeable one is right there? Very foolish. While DSWT deserves enumerable "thumbs up" and a standing ovation, Matson was not prepared for this visit, and spoke very poorly. Matson, you did not do right by this visit. Your words showed a personal lack of value, that it wasn't important to you. DSWT deserved so much better than that, and apparently, you didn't care. That is a shame to you. Was your primary job for a circus, rather than for National Geographic? With habit-formed words like "handler", "trainer" and "cage", you are not aligned to Nature at all.
Not a problem. It's a mere misunderstanding of what the keepers really are to the babies. We aren't used to the term "keeper" associated with elephants.
If the "professional interviewer" had prepared for the visit, they would have known that the title was "keeper." They are paid, yet they didn't treat the interview with the respect of learning beforehand. If they had professional ethics, they would have.
This comment shows that you didn't do your homework and don't know anything about me about me, and yet feel free to make such a slanderous accusation that implies I support using elephants in circuses. Nothing in my 21 years of doing stories for National Geographic would hint at any support for circus acts with animals. In this story I first introduced the team working with the elephants as keepers and then in a later reference said trainers by mistake but corrected it to keepers. It was an unedited unscripted interview with a quickly corrected misspoken word. Your comment indicates you are above having ever used the wrong word by mistake when knowing the right word. Congratulations on your perfection. But every journalist I know has at some point used the wrong word when talking live or live to tape. Hopefully you catch it in time to correct yourself as I did in this story.
wow .. seems u were really hurt bout that idiotic comment of a troll . there will be always negative & mean ppl who try 2put down good work of others . Simply ignore them ! Thankyou 4 your contribution to support the DSWT KenYa . Well done !!
Whenever the word trainer was used, it was corrected to ' keeper'. These dedicated men are not training the elephant calves; they are taking the place of lost mothers and providing a herd family.
@@margiewatson6081 Matson is supposed to be a professional, yet obviously didn't do proper homework (due diligence) before the interview. Matson did a very poor job, getting paid A++ money for D- work.
Your apology is excepted by me, yes we have all miss spoken and not used the right choice of words. I am sure that because you are from a country that has MANY elephant trainers it was easy to make that mistake.
That really showed, and it is shameful and disrespectful. If I did that kind of "work", I'd be seriously embarrassed, and I would never upload it. Matson's lack of preparation was disrespectful to the keeper, to the organization, to the important work they do, to the listeners, and to Matson. But apparently, Matson didn't or doesn't care about such values.
Absolutely. I can't imagine paying someone the money this person is paid for that kind of mediocre "work." They didn't even bother preparing for this interview, unless the reading of a simple paragraph counts as due diligence, which it doesn't. Matson's lack of preparation showed a lot of disrespect for the serious, invaluable work that SWT does.
they all love edward.. so touching. love how edward speaks..so eloquent
Love hear Edwin talk about elephant, lovely, good man❤
I love Elephant.. God bless these beautiful innocent animals 🐘🐘🐘❤️🙏
Even in 2019 we’re enjoying this video! Thank you for this!
DSWT IS AMAZING!
This publicity is so important to educate the world and gain help and donations.
Gonna miss Daphne Sheldrick ,the lady behind this conservation center.May she rest in peace.
How wonderful, I feel like I am there!
thanks for the informative and empathetic video. I'd just have one correction that Kibo (the main elephant in the video) is a boy. I think maybe for people who love elephants it's challenging to hear "trainer" or "handler" b/c they're associated with circuses or zoos (and have negative connotations). however, the reporter learned the term, keeper, quickly. in other ways the reporter appeared very informed about DSWT and elephant behavior and asked intelligent questions.
No, they sounded like they read a simple paragraph and called it a day. They made so many false statements, inaccurate statements, foolish statements, that it is apparent that they did not prepare for this visit or interview.
Love YOU😍❤💞💕💖💘👌🌻🐘💚🐘🌷⚘😇GOD BLESS, and THANK YOU DADDYS💘💖💘🐘🐘🐘🐘🌻
Well, they do train them to cope with the things they will eventually meet in the wild. They train them to be elephants, and it's not an easy task.
Obrigado a todos que contribui para tudo isso acontecer, essas pessoas são abençoada por Deus
Boyd Matson doesn't appear to have done proper preparation for this video, in light of inaccurate statements and wording. In the video description, the first statement made is a false one: "Orphaned elephants have a hard time surviving without their mothers." That is blatantly incorrect. Orphaned elephants do Not survive without their mothers. In the video, Matson repeatedly mislabels these caretakers as "trainers" when they are not. These are not circus animals, they are animals from the Wild that are being nurtured and hand-reared for their survival. The elephant is Not in a "cage." Matson's verbiage is shamefully unlearned/incorrect/foolish. Their mothers did Not "abandon" them; their mothers were poached, or died from drought or other situation that was unavoidable by the mother elephant. It's unfortunate that Matson created a video where clearly, Matson had not done due diligence in first learning the subject matter. Before doing any radio show or other program, a true professional would prepare by learning the subject. I am dismayed that this person didn't do due diligence, and apparently, didn't take the subject seriously enough to first learn. This indicates a lack of respect for the seriousness of the situation, a lack of respect for their so-called "professional" role as a communicator, and a lack of respect for those they are supposing to inform. Where is the excellence in poor, blatantly false and inaccurate communication? DSWT does vital work that's very important, and it is offensive that Matson didn't see fit to be bothered to first learn with diligence. Matson, your reading an informational paragraph to prepare for this visit didn't equate to due diligence or adequate preparation. Become studious, invest the time, do due diligence, learn the realities before you attempt to teach others. 02:54 The name is Not "Seldrick", but Sheldrick. It feels like this person, Matson, wasn't serious about doing a good job at all. This is very poor and shamefully lazy. Foolish false "humor" doesn't replace intelligent communication. If the elephant had wanted to take the hat off, she would have and could have. Touching and sniffing are not trying to take the hat off, and the elephant was not saying "you're in the presence of a lady." Matson was trying to cover the lack of preparation with foolishness that was not humorous, but a disrespectful waste of time. Matson should have remained quiet and allowed Edwin to do the informing. Why would a person that is Not the knowledgeable one attempt to do the informing, when the knowledgeable one is right there? Very foolish. While DSWT deserves enumerable "thumbs up" and a standing ovation, Matson was not prepared for this visit, and spoke very poorly. Matson, you did not do right by this visit. Your words showed a personal lack of value, that it wasn't important to you. DSWT deserved so much better than that, and apparently, you didn't care. That is a shame to you.
Was your primary job for a circus, rather than for National Geographic? With habit-formed words like "handler", "trainer" and "cage", you are not aligned to Nature at all.
CA Catr. I am really upset right now. I didn't like your comment at all. 😠
Not a problem. It's a mere misunderstanding of what the keepers really are to the babies. We aren't used to the term "keeper" associated with elephants.
If the "professional interviewer" had prepared for the visit, they would have known that the title was "keeper." They are paid, yet they didn't treat the interview with the respect of learning beforehand. If they had professional ethics, they would have.
Great stuff but I also remember the late Bob Simon’s stories on the Sheldrick....
the choice of word 'trainer' shows that boyd matson is most likely an advocate for Ringling Brothers Circus. Trainers!?
This comment shows that you didn't do your homework and don't know anything about me about me, and yet feel free to make such a slanderous accusation that implies I support using elephants in circuses. Nothing in my 21 years of doing stories for National Geographic would hint at any support for circus acts with animals. In this story I first introduced the team working with the elephants as keepers and then in a later reference said trainers by mistake but corrected it to keepers. It was an unedited unscripted interview with a quickly corrected misspoken word. Your comment indicates you are above having ever used the wrong word by mistake when knowing the right word. Congratulations on your perfection. But every journalist I know has at some point used the wrong word when talking live or live to tape. Hopefully you catch it in time to correct yourself as I did in this story.
wow .. seems u were really hurt bout that idiotic comment of a troll . there will be always negative & mean ppl who try 2put down good work of others . Simply ignore them ! Thankyou 4 your contribution to support the DSWT KenYa . Well done !!
A bit harsh, don't you think?
Trainer? Train for what?
Whenever the word trainer was used, it was corrected to ' keeper'. These dedicated men are not training the elephant calves; they are taking the place of lost mothers and providing a herd family.
@@margiewatson6081
Matson is supposed to be a professional, yet obviously didn't do proper homework (due diligence) before the interview. Matson did a very poor job, getting paid A++ money for D- work.
C T:I beg you pardon? 🙄
This Matson guy, dear oh dear! Keeps calling these wonderful 'KEEPERS'.......trainers, ffs! Where does he think he is, some circus or something.
Your apology is excepted by me, yes we have all miss spoken and not used the right choice of words. I am sure that because you are from a country that has MANY elephant trainers it was easy to make that mistake.
The interviewer was not prepared for this visit. True professionals take their jobs seriously, they study ahead of time, and this one didn't.
boyd matson didn't do his homework before filming.
That really showed, and it is shameful and disrespectful. If I did that kind of "work", I'd be seriously embarrassed, and I would never upload it. Matson's lack of preparation was disrespectful to the keeper, to the organization, to the important work they do, to the listeners, and to Matson. But apparently, Matson didn't or doesn't care about such values.
You out of your depth here Matson, go find something else to do.
Absolutely. I can't imagine paying someone the money this person is paid for that kind of mediocre "work." They didn't even bother preparing for this interview, unless the reading of a simple paragraph counts as due diligence, which it doesn't. Matson's lack of preparation showed a lot of disrespect for the serious, invaluable work that SWT does.